• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Cosmological argument

Extracts from this document...


"Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument. To what extent do the weaknesses of this argument limit its effectiveness." The cosmological argument aims to provide a method of proving god exists by using the logic that there had to be a first cause in the Universe. This was first proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas in the first three of his Five Ways. His first way of trying to prove God's existence was motion or change. What he says is that in the world things are in motion or changing. Whatever is in motion must have been moved by something else. There can be no infinite regress of motion, therefore there must have been a first Mover which itself as unmoved. This Unmoved Mover began this chain of movement and this Mover was God. Something cannot move or change itself as it would have to be actual and potential at the same time. An object has the potential to move but does not actually move until something causes it do so. For example, wood has the potential to be hot but it is not until it has been set alight. However, the First Way goes against Newton's first law of motion, in which movement can be explained by a body's own inertia from previous motion. ...read more.


The universe is the totality of all things. Therefore, the Universe is contingent. As there must be a sufficient reason for everything, there must be a cause for the universe or a necessary being as Copleston called it. This necessary being must be eternal, non-contingent, and metaphysical. This necessary being is God. As you can see Copleston's theory of contingency depends on the Principle of Sufficient Reason as put forward by Gottfried Leibniz. He said that nothing takes place without a sufficient reason. Thus, everything requires a complete explanation. You cannot describe your existence by saying that you are the child of your parents as this gives only a partial explanation. For a complete or sufficient reason, we must go back until there is something that is non-contingent. This is what Leibniz calls God. As can be seen, acceptance of Copleston's theory of contingency depends on your acceptance of the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Another flaw, however, was pointed out by Bertrand Russell in this same debate. He said that Copleston believes that the qualities of the part must be reflected in the whole. If the parts are contingent then the whole is contingent. However, this isn't necessarily true. All humans have mums yet humanity (the totality of humans) doesn't have an overall mum. ...read more.


By following the logic further the principle itself needs a sufficient reason as everything must have a sufficient reason. This would lead to an infinite regress of reasons and as proved by the Kalam Argument this cannot exist. Modern science further weakens the cosmological argument. The Big Bang provides a scientific explanation of the first cause of the universe, and thus eliminates the necessity for a God. The Steady State theory states that the universe has always existed as it is now, and thus is eternal. This eliminates the necessity for a first cause to the Universe. It seems that there needn't be a God for the universe to exist. Furthermore, Quentin Smith used quantum mechanics to demonstrate the possibility of things existing without a direct cause. The universe may have had a beginning, but there is not reason to think that it is God. As in the teleological argument, there may be a creator to the universe but who goes to say there can't be many? In conclusion, I believe the weaknesses outweigh the strengths of the design argument. While there may be no infinite regress of time in the Universe, there is no reason to assume that this first cause is God. While I may disagree with Hume in that there is no infinite regress I agree with him that his beginning need not be God. Therefore, I believe the cosmological argument alone to not be a sufficient proof of the existence of God. ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. Explain the Ontological argument.

    Hume argued that to discuss the universe in human terms is an unacceptable analogy, it would be better to describe the universe as a inert animal or vegetable- something which grows by its own accord as opposed to a machine, which is something made by hand.

  2. The Teleological Argument.

    Until a few years ago there were several gaps in science which have now been filled resulting in greater proof of the 'design argument'. A former professor at the University of Cambridge, John Polkinghorne speaks of the creation of the world as 'delicate and intricate in order to be able to support human life.'

  1. To what extent the Hare Krishna movement can be described as a cult

    The goal of Vedic knowledge, and of all theistic religions, is to achieve love of God. 5. We can perfectly understand the knowledge of self-realisation through the instructions of a genuine spiritual master- one who is free from selfish motives and whose mind is firmly fixed in meditation on Krishna.

  2. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument

    However, one could argue about questioning beyond God and involving infinite regress. The philosopher J.L. Mackie criticized the Cosmological argument because he wanted to question beyond God; why does God have to be the final conclusion? Another school of thought could argue that the so called prime mover wasn't God

  1. Birth Of The Universe

    with a certain intensity of light, out of this rippling, out of this interference pattern, emerges a three-dimensional image, a three-dimensional illusion that you can view from all sides. If you try to touch it, you realize it's not solid.

  2. What are the key features of the design argument for the existence of God? ...

    Other evidence includes Newton's laws of nature to explain regularity in the universe and he argues that this regularity could not occur without a designer imposing it. Paley's teleological approach comprises of two arguments, the first being design qua purpose and the second design qua regularity.

  1. Bertrand Russell and Atheism.

    The atheist cannot be expected to prove God's non-existence; however, one should not accept God's existence without good reasons. (Ditto for pink elephants.) I think it is absurd that children are 'born into' a religion. No one wants to admit that they believe in their religion simply because they were brought up that way.

  2. A Big Bang Cosmological Argument for God's Nonexistence

    supposing that there was a first phase in the world's history, i.e., a phase immediately before which there existed neither matter, nor minds, nor anything else. I suspect that my difficulty about a first event or phase in the world's history is due to the fact that, whatever I may

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work